More
Technically, color schemes can be trademarked or at least extended IP protection. However, its just incredibly difficult to get done.
Citigroup actually has a trademark for the blue gradient that they use.
But doesn't this also qualify as a logo for icon?
I don't think so. Citigroup has a logo, it's citi with the red arch between the I's.
Show Image
But beyond that trademark, they also have protectable rights over something like this.
Show Image
http://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=2005506&caseSearchType=US_APPLICATION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=documentSearch
I'm just saying, color schemes can in fact be protectable IP. However, in the case of Mito, since the color scheme is solely a feature of the product itself, he wouldn't have any IP protection.
You're confounding trade dress, which is capable of being trademarked as it is branding, with stuff that cannot be trademarked or copyrighted, like color ways.
So what you are saying is trade dress can be trademarked. In America, trade dress specifically refers to the following things, the shape/configuration of a product, the packaging of a product, the color of a product or packaging, and the flavor of a product.
I'm sorry I'm confused, so are you saying colors can or can't be trademarked?
Trade dress is your brand identity. With regards to colors, a trademark-able color is a specific color that was created to uniquely and distinctly identify your brand. It's also a color that is neither functional nor one that is aesthetic. It must be used to identify your brand.
Pulse is not a brand, as such, it is not something that could be trademarked. I don't know how I could say it any clearer than has already been stated several times in here.
You should re-read what I said, I never said that Pulse can be trademarked, I was simply saying that a color can be trademarked, since up and down this thread people kept saying color cannot be trademarked, when in fact it can.
Also, a color need not be a specific color created for you, it just has to be a color that is peculiar within your market. The color can't solely be functional or aesthetic, but that doesn't mean that a color used in trade dress can't have those qualities.
I mean why use color if not for its aesthetic value? I can almost guarantee every color that is currently trademarked was incorporated into the brand identity because of aesthetic purposes.
I'm just saying, color schemes can in fact be protectable IP. However, in the case of Mito, since the color scheme is solely a feature of the product itself, he wouldn't have any IP protection.